Bad Call?

[Daniel_LaFleur]

Originally Posted by Feisty_one

I am surprised that the placement of a tube under a ramp bot (before deployment) is not used as a tactic to at least hinder some of the really good ramps, such as 1319.

I'm more surprised that taking a 10 point penalty (being in the opposing teams home zone at the end) and stuffing a tube under the ramp bot (thus negating a 60 point lift) hasn't become a tactic.

[Chris Fultz]

it is becoming a strategy, and was used several times at Long Island - knowking the tubes down tubes along the back wall or placing one near a ramp bot to make it tougher for a ramp bot to deploy or for some robots to climb.

[Feisty_one]

This is true. Even if you take the full 30 point penalty for remaing in the box the entire period, that's 30 points saved over a sure ramp score.

Has anyone actually backed their robot up to a ramp to keep it from dropping? Would that be considered contact above the bumper zone if the ramp hits your robot?

That would be a pretty extreme measure, but who knows?

[akeisic]

I agree with the calls that have been made. While we may disagree with the rules interpretation, it does make it alot easier for the refs to make the call - and they have been consistant in making the call. In talking to some refs, I also learned that a robot on top of a deflated tube ontop of a unsupported ramp is also cause to disallow the bonus. So ramp bots make sure you're ramps are unsupported and ramping bots make sure you're not running over any tubes.

[akeisic]

[quote=Feisty_one;609164]
Has anyone actually backed their robot up to a ramp to keep it from dropping? Would that be considered contact above the bumper zone if the ramp hits your robot?
QUOTE]

The refs could DQ the robot that back up to the ramp. Rule G38 prevents the intentional entanglement of opposing robots. It's the blocking robot's intention to become entangled with the ramp bot.

While I see scatterring tubes in your opponents home zone as a viable strategy, I hope no one delibrately interfers with robots deploying ramps during the end game.

[Feisty_one]

Agree on deliberate entanglement, but what if my robot occupies the spot where the ramp needs to fall (I have not made contact). If the ramp drops on me, who is the offender? I would think the rampbot, since it initiated the contact. I certainly would not recommend this as a tactic though.

[Scott team 48]

Originally Posted by Feisty_one

Agree on deliberate entanglement, but what if my robot occupies the spot where the ramp needs to fall (I have not made contact). If the ramp drops on me, who is the offender? I would think the rampbot, since it initiated the contact. I certainly would not recommend this as a tactic though.

That would be a yellow card worthy offense I believe, because to apply this strategy you would have to occupy the opposing home zone during the end game period.

[EricH]

Originally Posted by Scott team 48

That would be a yellow card worthy offense I believe, because to apply this strategy you would have to occupy the opposing home zone during the end game period.

30 points. It wouldn't be carded unless it was done multiple times. See the LSR quarterfinals for a use of this strategy and the aftermath.

[GaryVoshol]

Let's review. You have one robot. It has many parts. All the parts are connected to the robot. If any of those parts are supported by a tube, the robot is supported. It's that simple. And that's how the GDC has ruled.

Without that ruling, you would have the complication of deciding how much of a robot has to be supported before the whole thing is considered supported.